Back

Infective Endocarditis Prophylaxis Practices in Pediatric and Congenital Patients with Cardiac Implantable Electronic Devices: An International PACES Survey

Batra, A. S.; Hamidy, M.; McCanta, A. C.; Sell, L.; Silka, M.

2026-02-09 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.02.05.26345706 medRxiv
Show abstract

Structured AbstractO_ST_ABSBackgroundC_ST_ABSGuideline recommendations for infective endocarditis (IE) prophylaxis have narrowed significantly over the past decade. However, these recommendations are derived from adult data and may not adequately account for the unique risk factors for IE in pediatric and congenital heart disease (CHD) patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). ObjectiveTo characterize contemporary IE cases and prophylaxis practices among members of the Pediatric and Congenital Electrophysiology Society (PACES) and assess how these practices align with or diverge from current international guidelines or practice recommendations. MethodsA cross-sectional, web-based survey was distributed to PACES members worldwide. Questions addressed prophylaxis practices for CIED implantation, reinterventions, and bacteremia-inducing procedures, as well as clinician experience with IE in patients with CIED. Responses were analyzed descriptively. ResultsSubstantial practice heterogeneity was identified across multiple clinical scenarios. Although most clinicians aligned with guideline recommendations for patients with structurally normal hearts, nearly all respondents (92.3%) reported recommending lifelong prophylaxis for patients with complex or repaired CHD. Among 35 reported IE cases, 97% occurred in transvenous systems, 77% occurred >6 months post-implantation, and 90% lacked a clear procedural or infectious trigger. Despite successful device extraction in 77% of cases, significant morbidity and mortality were observed. ConclusionCurrent practice patterns among pediatric and congenital electrophysiologists reflect uncertainty regarding the applicability of adult-derived IE prophylaxis guidelines to younger patients with CIEDs. High observed morbidity, long-term device exposure, and distinct anatomic considerations highlight the need for pediatric-specific risk stratification and updated guidance.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.